Saturday, December 27, 2014

NEW
YORK (C-Fam) As Christians around the world got ready to contemplate the
innocence of the child Jesus, last week the Russian Orthodox Church took on a
UNICEF paper that says children have LGBT rights.

The
Patriarch’s Commission on the Family of the Russian Orthodox Church released a scathing
statement criticizing a UNICEF
position paper that urges countries to protect LGBT rights because, it
says, it is in the “best interests of children.” The Commission turns the
tables on UNICEF and says: “Placing children to be raised by same-sex couples
is a gross violation of the rights and interests of a child.”

The
Orthodox Commission said it was “gravely concerned” that UNICEF would throw its
weight behind what it calls notions that are “devoid of sound international
legal basis” and “contrary to most of the nations’ traditional cultures, as
well as norms of natural and religious morality.” As a result, the commission
says it is “harmful to the international community and will undermine the moral
legitimacy of UNICEF and other UN bodies.”

The
UNICEF paper acknowledges that “there is no binding international instrument
that explicitly addresses discrimination against individuals based on their
sexual orientation and gender identity.” At the same time UNICEF cites the
non-binding opinion of UN experts on the Committee on the Rights of the Child
(CRC), which monitors the implementation of the Convention on the Rights of the
Child, to elevate sexual orientation and gender identity to the level of
categories of non-discrimination like race, sex and religion.

The
same UN committee told the Catholic Church this year that its doctrine on
abortion was a human rights violation, and told Israel that circumcision is a
violation of the bodily integrity of the child.

The
position paper goes beyond a mere acknowledgement of the CRC’s interpretation
of the Convention on the Rights of the Child. It also purports to instruct
countries on how they are to report to the Committee on the Rights of the
Child: “CRC member states and signatories should report on discrimination on
the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity, including discrimination
and bullying in schools and educational establishments.”

UNICEF
invites countries to repeal laws that criminalize the promotion of
homosexuality to minors or that prohibit the association of children with LGBT
adults, such as the one that Russia passed last year, and then “equalize the
age of consent for both heterosexual and homosexual conduct.”

It
also recommends providing “LGBT couples and their children with the legal
recognition of their family ties.” On this the Patriarch’s Commission had a few
choice words: “UNICEF should know that children are born of a union of a man
and a woman, not of a same-sex union. It is in the best interests of a child to
be born into and raised by family, so that he can know his loving and caring
father and mother” the statement reads.

The
Commission ends by calling upon the international community to “use every legal
means to stop international bodies from abusing their capacities in such a
manner.”

Sunday, December 21, 2014

Germans Protest Islam, Leftwing Media
Denounces Putin

By Julio
Severo

On
Monday, December 15, some 15,000 people in Germany took part in a demonstration
labeled by the German press as ‘xenophobic.’ The demonstration was held by the
Patriotic Europeans Against the Islamization of the West (PEGIDA, by its
German-language acronym), whose main objective is to oppose Islamic immigration
from the Middle East and Africa. Since October, PEGIDA has held weekly rallies
against Islam.

German
chancellor Angela Merkel has condemned PEGIDA, declaring, “There is no place in
Germany for those who are instigating hatred against immigrants.” She also denounced
the protesters for “racism.”

According
to Jihad
Watch, “Despite efforts by German politicians and the media to
portray PEGIDA as neo-Nazi, the group has taken great pains to distance itself
from Germany’s extreme right. The group says that it is ‘apolitical’ and that
its main objective is to preserve what is left of Germany’s Judeo-Christian
culture and values.”

PEGIDA
has mobilized thousands of German citizens to take to the streets to protest
the growing Islamization of their country.

The American
and other Western leftwing media have become accustomed to criticize anti-Islam
protests as ‘racist.’ Yet, the German protests have, enigmatically, instigated
the American Left to attack Putin.

Major
American leftwing media outlets The
Huffington Post and Bloomberg
say that the anti-Muslim demonstrations are “far-right” and a strategy of the Russian
President Vladimir Putin. In contrast, Jihad Watch, a group that monitors Islam
and its advances in the West, has validated the demonstrations as an attempt to
defend Judeo-Christian culture and values in Europe. Jihad Watch is praised
by conservative WorldNetDaily.

Bloomberg
says about PEGIDA, “Putin’s strategy seems to be to build up a ‘fifth column’
of far-right parties in Europe willing to cooperate with the Kremlin.”

Even
in Brazil, the leftwing media has denounced Putin as a KGB agent.

If
you think that what is happening is madness, consider Stephen Suleyman Schwartz,
the author of the anti-Putin and anti-Russia article in The Huffington Post. Schwartz
is the director of the Center for Islamic Pluralism. His father was Jewish and
his mother was a Protestant who was a member of the Communist Party in America.
Even so, he managed to convert to Islam.

Now,
with his vast (mad) experience he is defending Islam in Europe against
anti-Islam ‘conspiracies’ from Putin.

He
denounces that PEGIDA anti-Islamic demonstrations have slogans like “Frieden
mit Russland! Nie wieder Krieg in Europa!” (“Peace with Russia! Never again war
in Europe!”) and “Putin, hilfe uns!” (“Putin, help us!”).

Then Schwartz
says, “Many observers may see in PEGIDA no more than another example of the ‘new
populism’ in Europe. But an anti-Islam, pro-Russian alliance is dangerous for
its advocates. Alignment of Russian ambitions and German discontent has been
seen before: in the Stalin-Hitler pact of 1939, which allowed Germany to
conquer most of Europe before turning on Russia. Germans should be wary about
these issues.”

Don Hanks,
an American expert on Russian language and culture, notes Schwartz’s exaggerations:
“This author is either hopelessly naive or, more likely, a shill for the
transnational elites who want to control the universe from Washington. It
is beyond absurd to warn that an anti-Islam alliance smacks of Nazism. Hitler
had an alliance with Muslims, especially the Mufti, against the Jews and
these Muslims also killed hundreds of Christian Serbs for good
measure. The pro-Russian alliance that Hitler entered into was with an atheist
and communist who had absolutely nothing in common with Putin, who promotes Orthodox
Christianity, and was not even a Russian (Stalin was Georgian)! The utter
irony of this is that the most dangerous alliance in the world today by far is
US-NATO-EU. So far the EU has taken over over 28 countries and absorbed them.
That’s not expansionism? (Oops, I forgot, it’s exceptionalism). The first EU
Commissioner was Walter Hallstein, a nazi who wrote the ‘Pride and Blood’ law
forbidding Germans to marry Jews. A Nazi professor in the Third Reich wrote the
blueprint for the EU, as described
by UK authors Rodney Atkinson and Edward Spalton. All journalists should be
required to take a test in Russian history and culture, and should have an IQ
of at least 80. That would eliminate a lot of this disinformation. It would be
good if more readers used their heads for something other than a hat rack as
well.”

Even
though PEGIDA has been portrayed as ‘racist’ and ‘extremist’ by the leftwing
media, Deutsche Welle has said
about PEGIDA demonstrators: “the majority are completely normal people. Of
course, they’re not people who usually vote Green, or the Left party, or the
SPD [Social Democrats], but they’re not extremists.”

PEGIDA’s
motto is “We are the people!” (Wir sind das Volk!), the same slogan used by
East Germans to bring down the Berlin Wall in 1989.

Even
so, the Left is implicating PEGIDA in Putin’s alleged ‘communist’ conspiracies.

If Putin
were really a communist agent, would they be implicating him in conspiracies with
conservatives in Germany?

In
the Soviet times, the American leftist media faithfully attacked America and
praised the Soviet Union. Just to be clear: the Left always protects the Left.

In
the current situation between America and Russia, the American Left and even
the Brazilian Left protect America and attack Russia.

Are
there more socialists in America than in Russia?

Don Hanks
has another explanation: “Left and right is irrelevant these days when it comes
to Putin. Russophobia is de rigueur if you want to get ahead in politics and
media these days.”

Nowadays,
incredibly ultra-nationalism has united American left-wingers and right-wingers
against Russia. American right-wingers hate Russia for its communist past and because
Russia is the only nation able to challenge minimally the U.S. supremacy around
the world.

American
left-wingers hate Russia for its present conservative laws and because the
Orthodox Church is heavily involved in the government affairs. The Left hates Church
and government together!

If Putin
wants the American Left to love and defend Russia again, he should do more than
Obama
has done: to embrace Marxism, Islam and gay ideology. And to expel
the Orthodox Church from his government. Afterwards he should try to convince
the Western media that he is more Marxist than Obama is. He should say to them,
“Look, now I have allowed gay parades in Moscow and I have revoked the ban on
homosexual propaganda to children. Now Russian children will be exposed to all
kinds of homosexual sexual activity. Besides, I proclaim that Islam is a ‘religion
of peace,’ just as Obama does! What about now? May you at last love me and
Russia again?”

Yet,
Germans should not be deterred by American leftist propaganda, especially The Huffington Post and Bloomberg,
which preache that anti-Islam opposition is a Putin’s conspiracy. And even if
it is so, an anti-Islam conspiracy is better than an pro-Islam conspiracy. There
is information that Obama has been championing Marxism and Islam. He is their greatest advocate. Does
this secret that explain why Obama is loved and Putin is hated by the Western
mass media?

Nevertheless,
we should not miss the point that the biggest threat to Europe today is Islamic
immigration. Islam intends to change Europe, by destroying what is left of its
Christian culture and establish an Islamic dictatorship.

Whoever
helps Islamic expansion in Europe is an enemy of Europe. Whoever helps save Europeans
from the incoming Islamic dictatorship is not an enemy.

The Western
media interpret who the enemy is. This is why they praise Obama and attack
Putin.

My
view? I think that whoever defends Europe from Islam deserves support. I would
support even the pope in this just cause. But, sadly, Pope
Francis has said that “equating Islam with violence is wrong,”
essentially agreeing with Obama that Islam is a “religion of peace.”

If
there is hope for Europe to escape Islamization, will it come from Obama or the
pope?

The
real point is not if Obama, the pope and Putin are attacking or defending
Islamization of Europe. The point is that European natives have a right to
reject Islamization without being labeled ‘racist.’

1. The Australian media did not call the
Islamic terror attack an Islamic attack or even a terror attack.

2. Celebrities and tens of thousands
of everyday Twitter users flooded
the social media to show support for Muslim community.

3. In the past, Monis received
300 community service hours for sending hate mail to the families of Australian
dead soldiers. No prison for him.

How is
consistent the politically correct madness of Australia or for that matter the
Western world?

Let
us use some hypothetical examples:

A
Christian in Syria or Iraq needs a refugee status in Australia or another
Western nation. His reason? He is fleeing ISIS, who beheaded his family and
raped his female relatives. He is denied, but Monis, who is connected to ISIS, was
granted a refugee status in Australia. Sadly, Monis’ example is not
hypothetical!

Another
case. A Christian minister held an unknown number of homosexual hostages in a café.
Of course, such case has never happened, and even if it happened one single
time, the Western media would treat it as terror attack. Celebrities and tens
of thousands of everyday Twitter users would flood the social media to attack
the Christian community.

Another
case yet. A Christian minister sends hate mail to Muslim in Australia. Would courts
be satisfied to sentence him to 300 community service hours? Certainly, celebrities
and tens of thousands of everyday Twitter users would flood the social media to
ask prison time for him.

In
Muslim nations, Christians are second-class citizens. Under ISIS, they can be
beheaded like pigs in a terrifying industrial scale. Celebrities and tens of
thousands of everyday Twitter users do not have flooded the social media to
show support for the suffering Christian community.

In
the Western nations, Christians are also second-class citizens, below Muslims,
who even when they commit terror acts, they are not labeled terrorists, while
Christians who preach against homosexuality are labeled terrorists even when they
have never committed a single terror act!

How
can secular Western governments respect Christians when even Christians do not
respect their brothers and sisters? After 9/11, Bush, who is an evangelical
Christian, called Islam a “religion of peace.” Are its yearly genocides by
Islamists against Christians a manifestation of ‘peace’?

In
the immediate aftermath of the terror attack in Australia, the Vatican asked,
according to the Associatd
Press, “the U.S. to find an ‘adequate humanitarian solution’ for
prisoners held at the Guantanamo Bay detention center, a reflection of Pope
Francis’ vocal concern that prisoners be treated with dignity and not be
subject to inhumane treatment.”

Should
we care about how the U.S. treats Islamic terrorists under its custody?

Should
we not care about how ISIS treats thousands and thousands of Christian men,
women and children in its grip?

Saturday, December 13, 2014

The Pope and Dogs in Heaven

By Julio
Severo

Some
news services interpreted
that Pope Francis reportedly said that dogs also go to Heaven. If he was really
misinterpreted, so do these dogs have nothing to do with animals? Is another
kind of dog? Should he be interpreted, in his precariously disguisable socialism,
that Fidel Castro and his gang also have a chance to the heavenly Paradise?

Speaking
about Fidel, why has no pope ever condemned communism in his visit to Cuba? If
any other world leader visited Cuba without condemning communism, he would be
branded in the least a hypocrite, a coward or even an accomplice.

Speaking
about salvation of dogs, is there a chance for Fidel go to Heaven? Of course.
Firstly, he should repent from his sins and accept Jesus and his forgiveness,
deliverance and salvation. It is evident that after such experience, he would
renounce communism.

The
same is true for Obama and Brazilian socialist President Dilma Rousseff.

In
fact, the same is true for socialists and anti-socialists. Anti-socialism does
not save anyone. It does not grant the Heaven to anyone. If an individual spent
his lifetime fighting socialism, but never knew Jesus and his salvation, he
will spend the whole eternity with Karl Marx.

Tuesday, December 09, 2014

Jewish Issues: A Clarification to Christians
about Their Perception on the Jews

Beheadings, Crucifixions, the Inquisition,
the Crusades, Pogroms, Spits and Socialism

By Julio
Severo

Sometimes,
I receive accusations from Christians, who say that I emphasize Muslim
persecution against Christians in the Middle East, but I never mention how the
Jews also persecute Christians.

Actually,
I have never published a single article on Jews in Israel beheading and
crucifying Christians. On the other hand, I have already published many
articles on Muslims committing such atrocities.

The
reason for it is not omission or some attempt to hide alleged beheadings and
crucifixions the Jews would be committing against Christians.

The
reason is simple: these atrocities against Christians are never perpetrated by
Jews — unless you want to compare a spittle with beheadings and crucifixions.

Yes,
Orthodox Jews — a minority in Israel that really practices Judaism — despise
Christians, and they show this contempt by spitting. It is a nasty act, but
very far away from beheadings and crucifixions.

The
Israeli society is not dominated by Orthodox Jews. Besides, as usual in the
Christendom, Judaism has several currents: liberal, moderate, Orthodox,
ultra-Orthodox. Even so, there are no beheaders and crucifiers among them.
There are spitters…

What
is the motivation of spits and contempt? Many of them are resentful of the Inquisition
and the Crusades, which savaged many Jews. But they do not distinguish between
Christians. They think that every Christian is responsible for the Inquisition
and for the Crusades, when in reality only the Catholic Church began and
finished these things.

In
their minds, the acts of the Catholic Church against the Jews are acts of all
Christian churches. It is a mistaken perception. Even with this mistaken
perception, they do not behead or crucify Christians in retribution for the Inquisition
and the Crusades.

Yet,
not only Jews have a mistaken perception. Christians who love Israel sometimes
exaggerate their love by worshipping everything done in Israel. In a worship
service in a large church in Brasília, Brazil, I heard a minister preaching about
the alleged wonders of kibutzes — collective farms where everybody eat in a communal
refectory and children are brought up in communal daycares. Kibutzes have no
origin in the Bible. Its origin is socialist European Jews who settled in
Israel in the early 1900s.

Yes,
there is socialism in Israel. The only nation in the Middle East having legal
abortion and gay parades is Israel.

The Israeli
military draft is compulsory for men and women. While in the U.S. conservatives
had been fighting for years to hinder their military from drafting women for
combats, Israel has followed this socialist model for years.

The
Israeli love for socialism is also despised by the Orthodox Jews. In fact, this
Israeli love for socialism has often been used by their enemies to paint the
Jews as wicked.

In
Brazil, the Jews, except the Orthodox ones, are traditional supporters of the
Left, including the ruling socialist Workers’ Party. In the United States, the
overwhelming majority of the Jews support Obama’s party — a party that has been
in the opposite direction of the interests of Israel and the real Christians.

How
explain Jews’ love for socialism? Because Karl Marx was a Jew?

One
of the explanations may be in the czarist Russia. In the late 1800s and early
1900s, the czar sanctioned laws against the Jews, and it produced the infamous
pogroms — violent attacks against the Jews and their properties.

Those
attacks were supported by leaders connected to the Orthodox Church, which was
not acting in a way different from the Inquisition and the Crusades of her sister,
the Catholic Church.

Facing
the extreme persecution from the czarist government, the Russian Jews had only
two options: 1. To flee for the U.S. (which was the largest Protestant nation
in the world). To flee for an Europe under Catholic influence was not in their
considerations. 2. To resist and fight.

For
those not fleeing for the U.S., the chosen resistance was to support Marxist
movements, which gave rise to the Soviet Union. Jews’ enemies use this episode
to try to portray the Jews as the creators of this evil empire, but this was
not the case. By an issue of sheer survival and to end pogroms, Russian Jews
gave their support to the communist revolution and the creation of the Soviet
Union.

If it
were possible for them, they would also have supported some way of resistance
to escape the Inquisition and the Crusades.

Pogroms
were a so terrifying persecution that Russian Jews did whatever was possible to
put an end to the czarist empire, even getting help from American bankers to
fund the birth of the Soviet Union. But the Jewish solution, though having
begun intended to save lives, eventually proved to be worse than the original problem.
It produced a bigger problem.

A similar
phenomenon happened in Germany in the early 1930s. With communism threatening
to win elections, even Lutheran ministers instructed their flocks to vote for
Adolf Hitler as the only ‘salvation’ against communism. However, the solution
eventually proved to be worse than the problem, especially for Jews, who
suffered the Holocaust. Despair pushes peoples to deadly ‘solutions.’

Truly,
in the Soviet Union the Jews were able to reach high posts in the government and
in the military — something mostly impossible in the Orthodox Russia or the
Catholic Europe. But the cost was very high.

Jews’
enemies enjoy emphasizing the Jewish participation in the birth of the Soviet
Union, but they conveniently cover the slaughters Jews underwent in the
Orthodox Russia. Those enemies are able to praise the Inquisition and the
Crusades without mentioning the suffering and the slaughters the Jews endured.

Jews’
traditional love for socialism is based in these historical factors and in
their fight to back movements to deliver them from intense persecutions of
political regimes connected to the Orthodox Church and the Catholic Church.

Orthodox
Jews have their historical reasons to spit on Christians. But they do not perceive
that their issues are only with Catholics and Orthodoxies.

Because
of these historical issues, Israel is today the only State in the Middle East
where socialism and capitalism are perfectly married.

Those
who hate Jews because of socialism should not ignore that they supported this
system because of despair and to survive from atrocious persecutions by ‘Christians’
who loved more the Inquisition, the Crusades and pogroms than they loved Jesus
Christ.

Those
who love Jews should not support kibutzes or the love of many of them for socialism.

Someday
the Jews are going to discover that the only salvation from the Inquisition,
the Crusades, pogroms, anti-Semitism and Islamic hatred is the greatest Jew
in the history — Jesus Christ.

Different
from the socialist ‘salvation,’ Jesus’ salvation has no widespread deadly side
effects.

Those
who know the salvation of this Jew should pray so that Jews around the world
may be delivered from their illusions regarding a socialist ‘salvation’ and
socialist ‘messiahs.’

Monday, December 08, 2014

Hillary Clinton: America should “empathize”
and “show respect” to her enemies

By Julio
Severo

Hillary
Clinton, who is expected to run for president in 2016, has been criticized
after saying that America should “empathize” and “show respect” to her enemies.

Hillary Clinton

Her
speech, focused on the promotion of feminist leadership, was given at
Georgetown University in Washington D.C., December 3, 2014.

Her
feminist approach is for America to use “every possible tool and partner” to
advance ‘peace.’ She elaborated that this approach means “showing respect,
even for one’s enemies; trying to understand and, insofar as psychologically
possible, empathize with their perspective and point of view.”

How
are we supposed to understand her speech? Who are these enemies of America?

We
are left at least with three possibilities:

1. Muslims. Muslims, especially from Saudi
Arabia, are behind the 9/11 terror attack. But if Clinton wants America to
empathize with Muhammad’s followers, she came too late. George W. Bush was a
pioneer in calling, immediately after 9/11, Islam a “religion of peace.” So,
since Bush, we are left with an impression that Islam is not America’s enemy. If this is the case, Clinton is not referring to Muslims, who have been treated with extreme
empathy by the U.S. government. The U.S. love affair with Saudi Arabia is
legendary. In this perspective, Muslims are not the U.S. enemies.

3. Progressives. So her call is self-serving. The
real enemies of America are individuals and institutions who want to disfigure
her from her original intent. The Founding Fathers were mostly evangelical Christians
and intended a nation especially to Christians. Hillary and her husband, former
U.S. President Bill, oppose this original form. Obama does too. And by
declaring that Islam is a “religion of peace,” even Bush opposed the Founding
Fathers’ intent. So, basically, Hillary Clinton meant, “I want America to
‘empathize’ and ‘show respect’ to me, my husband, Obama, Bush and other U.S.
presidents for every wicked pro-Islam act that put us on par with America’s
enemies.”

Certainly,
the Obama administration, the Clinton administration and, sadly, even the Bush
administration would ‘empathize’ and ‘show respect’ to themselves. I have
enclosed Bush because recently he
called Bill Clinton his ‘brother.’ Well, if I called Clinton or
Obama a ‘brother,’ I should be considered an enemy of America.

Besides,
when Bush called Islam a ‘religion of peace,’ he lied to America and to the
world. Clinton and Obama have agreed with and even promoted this lie. This has
been deceptive propaganda to America and the world, especially because Islam
is, by far, the biggest source of persecution and martyrdom for Christians
around the world.

Clinton
and Obama are progressive (socialist) Protestants. So they are pro-abortion and
pro-sodomy. In contrast, Bush is a generally pro-life and anti-sodomy
conservative evangelical. But all of them are proclaimers of Islam as a “religion
of peace.” In this respect, all of them have been liars, to the detriment of
many thousands of Christians, whose blood has been shed by Islamic butchers
every year.

Should
America be a friend of Islam? Should America be its chief proclaimer through
deception and a
sordid partnership with Turkey and Saudi Arabia? Is not proclaiming
Islam as a “religion of peace” cowardice and complicity in its many crimes,
genocides and slaughters of innocents?

My
question to the American people is: Should
you ‘empathize’ and ‘show respect’ to Clinton, Obama, Bush and other fellow
Americans while they ‘empathize’ and ‘show respect’ to Islam and aided and
abetted America to become such facilitator?

Thursday, December 04, 2014

Brazilian Families Want Legal Homeschooling

By Julio
Severo

A
group of families made a 12-hour trip to be in Brasilia, Brazil’s capital city,
to attend a vote in the Brazilian Congress on homeschooling. The vote was
postponed, but the presence of these families and their children touched the
hearts of many congressional representatives.

Homeschool families in the Brazilian Congress

These
families, who were sponsored by ANED (Associação Nacional de Educação
Domiciliar, National Home Education Association), promise to be in Brasilia
again next Wednesday, when there will be a possible new vote.

Congressmen touched by homeschool families

The
current Brazilian government is controlled by the socialist Workers’ Party, and
it is hostile to homeschooling. The past social democratic government, of the Marxist,
former President Fernando Henrique Cardoso, was similarly hostile.

The
ideological opposition by the Workers’ Party is reminiscent of the Workers’
Party in Germany some 80 years ago. In fact, this was the National Socialist
German Workers’ Party, also known as Nazi Party, which banned homeschooling in
Germany in the 1930s. After the ban, national socialist dictator Hitler said, “The
Youth of today is ever the people of tomorrow. For this reason we have set
before ourselves the task of inoculating our youth with the spirit of this
community of the people at a very early age, at an age when human beings are
still unperverted and therefore unspoiled. This Reich stands, and it is
building itself up for the future, upon its youth. And this new Reich will give
its youth to no one, but will itself take youth and give to youth its own education
and its own upbringing.”

Hitler’s
ban is in place in Germany even today. Germany, which is tolerant of many kinds
of radical Muslim practices and customs from its Islamic immigrants, has been radically
intolerant of every homeschooling practice of Christian parents.

Germany
is a long way from one of the most important founders of the modern German
language, Martin Luther, who said,
“I am much afraid that schools will prove to be the great gates of hell unless
they diligently labor in explaining the Holy Scriptures, engraving them in the
hearts of youth.”

About
the Brazilian government, why should it imitate the German government behavior
against Christian parents? About the Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff, who was an
admirer of the Soviet Union, why should she keep a ban on homeschooling? Why should
her administration persecute Christian parents who homeschool in a Christian
way?

The
Soviet Union no more exists. In modern Russia, homeschooling is legal. In my pro-life
and pro-family meeting in Moscow two months ago, one of the most prominent
homeschool leaders in the world told me that Russia has several homeschool
curriculums. In today’s Russia, it is not a crime to homeschool. Why in Brazil
is it?

CBN
News, of Pat Robertson, reported
that Russia “is one of the freest nations in which to homeschool.”

“We
have complete freedom of home education in Russia, in terms of legality,” Pavel
Parfentiev, a family rights advocate in Russia, said.

“The
Russian Federation is sort of a champion of human rights in this particular
area, so of course I think it is a good example for both Germany and Sweden
where home educators are persecuted,” he said to CBN News.

If
Rousseff admired the old Russia much, why should she admire new Russia less?
She should allow homeschooling and even imitate a Russian ban on gay propaganda
to protect children.

She
should not imitate Germany, which is intolerant of homeschooling by Christian
parents, but extremely tolerant of Islamic radicalisms.

Rousseff
should make a trip to Russia and learn basic lessons of freedom, protection and
educational choices for children.

Tuesday, December 02, 2014

Muhammad tops as the most popular baby boy name
in Britain

From Muslim cradle to British grave

There
is a surge in Islamic names in the U.K. in 2014, according to the Daily
Mail.

Mosque in Britain

The
champion is Muhammad, which is now the most popular male baby name in Britain.

Predictably,
Muslims will outnumber the ethnic British people in a few decades, and U.K.
will be officially Islamic.

Today,
many “English” Muslims, who are not ethnic British, are joining Islamic
terrorist groups in the Middle East. Usually, they were born to immigrant
parents.

In
the past, U.K. sent Christian missionaries to Muslim lands. Now, U.K. sends
Muslims to kill Christians in Syria and Iraq. This is a foretaste of what
ethnic British will experience from their fake ‘compatriots’ in the next years.

From
a Christian hotbed U.K. is becoming an Islamic hotbed.

Why
is this happening? The British people do not like babies and large families.
When U.K. was Christian, they knew that God likes babies and large families and
that the natural law fosters them.

Now Britain
loves the contraceptive culture, with its bonus of death culture. But the natural
law has no respect for both destructive cultures.

U.K. has
no respect for their Christian heritage or the natural law.

Any culture
that maintains marriage, family and babies will survive. Any culture that
despises them will die away. So it just natural that the British culture is
giving place to the Islamic culture.

A
bigger and bigger Muslim cradle spells a bigger and bigger British grave.

Britain
has lost in the cradle, and soon Muslims will give them a cultural, religious
and ethnic grave.